It's that time of year again. You guys want another one?

File: 1.jpg (543KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

543KB, 900x600px

If only I can be in it :)

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.0 (Windows)
Photographer	Great White Buffalo
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	2000 dpi
Vertical Resolution	2000 dpi
Image Created	2016:12:15 04:27:16
Exposure Time	0.6 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2984321
Why not

>>2984325
Because /p/ hates me :(

File: good luck.gif (2MB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x225px

>>2984320
Oh, Iggy. You're a glutton for punishment.

I wish you good luck and Godspeed.

>>2984341
Dude! Good to see you're still around hehe
Shoot me an email sometime.

>>2984341
>its a "trips no one cares about anymore try to get attention" thread
maybe if you guys posted on the board more than once a year rather than stoking its drama from your private facebook chats people would be more receptive to you.

>>2984345
If I wanted attention, I'd surely post more, right?

the rumors were true about the /p/ imagebook? I'm in if possible.

>>2984332
/p/ hates everyone :(

>>2984320
How's this all work though?

>>2984358
Pick a photo, send photo, wait 1-6 months for book to finish with your name hopefully spelled correctly.

>>2984359
What's the email to submit our photo?

>>2984362
I'll make another thread with details if this thread goes ~well~

>>2984364
>if this thread goes ~well~
>If I wanted attention, I'd surely post more, right?

who says you don't post all the time sans-trip? I know what you lot get up to.

>>2984369
>If I wanted attention, I'd surely post more, right?
If I post without trip, that would defeat the purpose of me wanting attention no?

>who says you don't post all the time sans-trip? I know what you lot get up to.
Yes, we have weekly meetings on how to cause drama on /p/, this is our life goal.

sure, maybe

i.. i never participated before.... h..how many can i sub.. submit?

>>2984374
>If I post without trip, that would defeat the purpose of me wanting attention no?
No, not really. Indirect attention is still attention.
Are we not paying attention to ISIS because I don't know a random mujahideen's name?

Yeah i want a book this year.

>>2984321
I hope this picture isnt in the book.

>>2984380
Touché.

>>2984383
It depends on whether you guys want a curated book or open submission book.

If you can get it out in a decent timeframe, then sure.

Last year's was a shitshow. By the time you finished it no one cared about it

>>2984384
>It depends on whether you guys want a curated book or open submission book.
and that depends on whether the "curated" book is curated or "curated"
>my friends just happen to be the best photographers on /p/, its not a circlejerk, honest

>>2984388
>and that depends on whether the "curated" book is curated or "curated"
>my friends just happen to be the best photographers on /p/, its not a circlejerk, honest

What? Are you new and only ever heard memes or do you not remember that literally anyone could be a curator?

>>2984389
>What? Are you new and only ever heard memes or do you not remember that literally anyone could be a curator?
yeah and anyone can cast a vote in the presidential election too but that doesn't mean we're all electors or swing-state voters

Anyone but iggy should do it.

>>2984417
lol

>>2984320
Are you actually going to deliver it even remotely on schedule this time? Or are you going to fuck off for months on end then come back claiming it wasn't your fault for the book being way overdue?

If the former, then yes, we want another book.

>>2984418
This
can isi or some other tripfag that actually participates on the board make it instead?
ta

>>2984422
Or have multiple tripfags work together on a collaborative curated book and chip in for the initial cost of the printing, and split the "profits" afterwards evenly. It wouldn't take too long.

2-3 weeks for submissions.

1 week to choose, arrange, design the image book.

2 weeks for the printers?

Then 1-2 weeks for shipping from the main tripfag (anon's have to pay for shipping and the book)

>>2984422
> ta
Forgot your trip omi##faggot

>>2984422
fuck no Iggy is the best

>>2984428
stop being dickwad.

>>2984427
"Or have multiple tripfags work together on a collaborative curated book"

RAF'd

Just no...

open for a number o photos, within a deadline. shared space for anons and trips.

>>2984422
>isi should curate the photobook
have you considered suicide

>>2984320
why do we only have a proper digital archive of two of these books?

>>2984427
You are a newfag arent you.
It costs nothing to make.
I wont give my money to any trips on here to copy and paste images on a blank page.

>>2984320
Yes, especially if it isn't curated and comes out 8 months too late again.

Please let me pay to suffer again.

How much does it cost with shipping to EU?

>>2984507
About threefiddy.

Book up

>>2984545
:^)

>>2984421
Are you actually going to deliver it even remotely on schedule this time?
Yes, It would be done in the correct amount of time.

>>2984427
>Or have multiple tripfags work together on a collaborative curated book
You really want /p/ to turn more into hell?

>chip in for the initial cost of the printing, and split the "profits" afterwards evenly.
What do you mean? there's no initial cost of printing and there's never been any profit from the books.

Blurb works like this, you make a book and upload it. If someone buys it, then it stays on the site forever.
If no one buys the book, it's deleted after about 3 weeks or so. There's no "Initial Cost" to print anything.

>>2984457
What do you mean? Are you looking for a physical archive?

>>2984466
>I wont give my money to any trips
You're not giving me money though.

>>2984507
I don't know, but blurb has distributing centers in Europe, so I don't think it costs that much.
Here's my proposal:

We make the book curated again and the submission limit is 2 photos max. This way we can keep the book at around 60~ pages.
The problem with the books, is that it's been getting more expensive after each run because of increased submission rate.
Last years book, 2015, runs at about 60-70 dollars for the softcover version, which is fucking expensive as shit.

And yes, I'll get it out by no later than February.

M-maybe

>>2984555
I am in for the curated version, the last one was a bit of a mess

>>2984555
I wasn't even participating and still I think making it curated to get "above average" artistic appeal or technical execution is a good idea.

>>2984555
I'm all for curated this time.

>and the submission limit is 2 photos max
So does this mean possibly both photos can make it in, or possibly both can be denied?

Or if both are eligible photos, will only the better of the two make it?

>>2984567
It depends, usually both photos are p good and go with each other, so yeah they would be in the same page. But if you send a picture of an animal and the other is like architecture, only one will be chosen because of the "Invisible Category".

Ideally, you should send 1 image so it can be printed huge on the page. but if you want, you can send two.

Circle jerk tripfriends get an automatic in, right?

>>2984569
Sounds good

>>2984572
No, please leave with that cancer. Also no lomo shots, which is 99.9% all your photos.

>>2984572
the only photos of yours with any value are self portraits because they offer a glimpse into the grotesque

what is the cheapest way to get a book of my photos with the best print quality?

If any one of you falls for this shithead's bullshit after what he did with the last "book" you should just go jump in front of a truck because you are wasting space and oxygen.

I'm all for a book but Iggy should not be allowed anywhere near it. He showed you all exactly why earlier this year.

>>2984345
>>2984349
Like the man said; you want drama most of the year and apparently just attention when it's book time.
People here generally have figured out by now that you and the rest of the facebook cunts are responsible for a good 90% of the shitposts on the board and roughly 0% of the actual photos and critique.
You should probably just fuck off entirely and let /p/ be a photography board again.

>>2984600
>You should probably just fuck off entirely and let /p/ be a photography board again.
Sounds good.

>>2984601
I wouldn't piss on your lousy book if it were on fire but I will paypal you a few bucks to leave this board and never come back.

>>2984603
How much we talking?

>>2984604
You'd obviously just take the money and keep doing what you're doing now.
Nobody here, including your friends, is stupid enough to believe a word you say.
Hell, ESPECIALLY your friends.

>>2984606
:(

>>2984578
At least I take photos

>>2984591
Coming from you that's high praise.

Yeah sure ill submit one or two for it

Haven't posted much this year but I'll try to submit some nice recent shots of mine.

Please do a curated version, Iggles.

My favorite part about this thread --- indeed, about this whole book process --- is how we'll spend the next 2-4 weeks arguing about this in thread after thread after thread and then the day after the submission deadline passes we'll have a dozen retarded anons complaining that they had no idea a book was being made.

>>2984596
Well, you could print them out at Wal-mart and stable them all together in a little booklet.

>>2984650
Such is the nature of shitpost season. It happens every year

>>2984603
>i'll give you money to leave
>>2984604
>How much we talking?
>>2984606
>i'm not giving you any money

I love how much you're contributing to this board. Really top notch stuff.

>>2984608
How do I submit a couple of my snapshits? Do I have to send the RAW as well? Do the Reuters rules stand here and no post processing allowed?

>>2984658
Iggy will post submissions instructions in a new thread later. This is just to get the word out.
No, you don't send raw. That's fucking retarded.
No, this isn't fucking Reuters. Send whatever the fuck you want. This isn't a journalism contest.

File: goofy.jpg (62KB, 640x499px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 640x499px

>>2984600
for a fact the only ''facebook cunt'' who still posts on /p/ is catsby. You and your friends did a great job off turning down most of the old aktive users. The /p/ you have right now is all yours~

File: tumblr_og6pb8l9ow1teqokwo1_1280.jpg (587KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

587KB, 1000x1000px

>>2984320
Yeah, I had a pretty decent 2016, so I vote book.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	264 dpi
Vertical Resolution	264 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:05 13:33:17

>>2984674
>great job off turning down most of the old aktive users
You did that to yourselves.

>>2984688
nope I'm still in contact with most of them they just don't bother posting here anymore

>>2984696
>just don't bother
maybe its because your friends doxx people

>>2984700
isi was thrown out of the chat a long time ago for being a cunt

>>2984555
>What do you mean? Are you looking for a physical archive?
I'm looking for a digital archive. Many more people look at this thing than actually purchase it. It looks like somebody's updated the sticky wiki but there's still nothing from before 2012 up there. I see you've got a straight pdf for the 2014 book (thank you!) but with the 2013 book people still have to put up with that obnoxious blurb interface. you don't have any curation seems great, there are usually too many throwaway/disconnected photos in these

>>2984702
isi never doxxed anyone.
iggy, lain, charlie, and catsby have

>>2984702
>isi was thrown out of the chat
isi started at least two other facebook chats and runs the /p/ discord server. You didn't throw her out, she left.

>>2984706
isi """doxxed""" moopco.
I've never doxxed anyone.

>>2984712
>isi """doxxed""" moopco.
is posting photos of someones face doxxing now?

>>2984713
I think she was the one who linked his reddit account first. Can't remember if she was the one who posted him and his girlfriends names, facebooks and blogs first.
Don't remember, don't really care. But I've never doxxed anyone at least.

>>2984706
I'm sorry to burst your bubble but I don't care enough about any of you to doox someone

>>2984716
>I think she was the one who linked his reddit account first.
That's not doxxing.
>Can't remember if she was the one who posted him and his girlfriends names, facebooks and blogs first.
Anons did that. But that's not doxxing either.

"search for and publish private or identifying information about (a particular individual) on the Internet, typically with malicious intent."

When you link to your own website and use your own name on 4chan, its not doxxing when someone refers to you by your name.

I don't see anyone screaming about isi getting doxxed when people call her "James", "jamie", "miss williams" and such.

>another thread where everyone points fingers at each other for doxxing and shitposting
anyone that actually knows this community well knows very well who is responsible for most of it. One of the formative figures of the early circlejerk. d. Mr. Dan Williams.
Remember when he circlejerked you guys with a photobook of absolutely shit photos?

>>2984723
I'll take your word for it

>it's a dramafags play innocent thread
when you coordinately shit on the board for 4 years straight what do you expect to happen

File: 1388363533370.gif (906KB, 450x360px) Image search: [Google]

906KB, 450x360px

>>2984724
at least someone is on the right track here fuck Dan

>>2984724
oh boy do I 'member
http://www.blurb.com/b/1022377-wanderings
its funny that he managed to finally convince people he was good, he was an utter joke in his early years

>>2984730
>when you coordinately shit on the board for 4 years straight
Because everybody has the patience and dedication of a guy who stayed mad about a misundertanding for 4 years and will continue to stay buttmad.

>>2984736
I don't know who you think I am but I'm not them. just an observer.
Thanks for the admission to guilt in a "misunderstanding" though, huh

>>2984739
lol

I want a book but Iggy shouldn't be the one in charge. Knowing him he'll probably deliver it super late, because he spends his days obsessed with his own legs. Stop with the bike meme.

>>2984767
this desu

So the 2015 book is finished...?

Is there a link to it? I honestly had no idea it was completed, I figured you gave up.

No one else thinks it's weird that a tripfag who literally never posts here wants to be the one to make the book?

like, when iggy posted all the time like three years ago, sure, it made sense. now he just shows up to be the guy who makes the book, and then to make six months worth of excuses about why the book isn't finished yet, and then to chastise us for not buying the book.

>>2984807
I think it's weird too
the problem is the only prominent tripfags on the board right now who might be willing to do it are even more cancerous
I mean, you really want a Sugar-curated photobook? or /p/: isi edition?

>>2984809
Bring someone out of retirement to do it.

>>2984809

i don't get why it has to be a tripfag. that's another curious problem with this board. 90% of the content and discussion is generated by anonymous, yet tripfags occupy 90% of the mindshare, and nostalgia threads are always dominated by "OHH YEAH THAT ONE OLD TRIPFAG WAS THE BEST." it makes no sense that anonymous doesn't trust itself or give itself any credit.

i'm going to give this thread some time to boil while i go to work. if we don't find a better solution, i'll make a book thread myself.

>>2984813
>it makes no sense that anonymous doesn't trust itself or give itself any credit.
its because they're anonymous and have no identity you nitwit

>>2984809
>/p/: isi edition?
Yeah I think that could be fine, Ive seen her talk about photography a lot and she seems apt at telling good from bad.

>>2984813
Anonymous is reality, Tripfags are detached, attention-starved autists.

Besides, who do you think wants to buy this book? Did you even look through the 2015 photos?

File: 1464063597264.png (254KB, 600x905px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 600x905px

>>2984820

Don't you mean

>we fucking nitwit

>>2984826
No, I'm not truly Anonymous, I just typed it in the name field. If you have 4chan Gold you can see post IDs anyway.

>>2984807
I don't post here because you can clearly tell if a photo is mine or not and the last few times I did, the threads were pure cancer. So why bother?

I still do this because I like the process, and I get nothing out of it. Other than alllllll that attention that the other anon mentioned, of course.

>>2984822
>she seems apt at telling good from bad.
So you rather 1 person curate the whole book rather than the board itself?

>>2984832
>because you can clearly tell if a photo is mine or not
unless you mean because you overuse 16:9 without any thought to it, no, your work does not stand out in any meaningful way. There are better Brazilians on this board, like Mirari, a Reuters shooter.

>>2984836
> your work does not stand out in any meaningful way.
Did I say it stands out because it's the best photos ever or strong compositions and stuff? No, stop assuming.

I edit in a particular way and you can clearly tell it's me, as I've done anon threads and got buttblasted for posting as anon.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>>2984839
>I edit in a particular way and you can clearly tell it's me, as I've done anon threads and got buttblasted for posting as anon.
Yeah how could anyone ever recognize your photos, its not as if you have half the board on your friends list on facebook, instagram, tumblr, and grindr

>>2984842
>grindr
Shhhh, keep at least 1 thing on the DL :(

>>2984842
jesus christ isi stop shitting up the board

>>2984839
>E-Everyone recognizes me!
>Muh special style!
Tripfags are THIS delusional and narcissistic.

>>2984846
I have cold hard data and research to prove this grand phenomenon though.

>>2984724
Oh man! I forgot about Dan the man!

>>2984846
Oversharpened, Fuji-color stylized scenes of Alabama poverty with white borders isn't hard to recognize.

Just because she's a cunt doesn't mean you can't see her bullshit a mile away.

>Book
Yes

>Drama
No

>Curation
Yes, I'm not buying a book with photos that people's mums rejected to put on the fridge. I don't mind if my photos get rejected either, just make it worth paying for.

Sidenote, link to 2015 book? I have a copy of 2014 but not 2015.

>>2984809

I should totally curate the photobook and pick entirely from the RPT and isi, just to piss off /p/

>I would

>>2984856
http://www.blurb.com/b/7343889-p-2015

>>2984650
I don't think you realise exactly how casual /p/ is

>>2984858
Cheers.

Good luck.

>>2984832
>So you rather 1 person curate the whole book rather than the board itself?
I'm voting for board curation

>>2984875
>I'm voting for board curation
You want an empty book?

>>2984878
I think it would be better for board culture and I'm morbidly curious to see the results

>>2984678
Lol

>>2984875
we tried to have a board curated version last year, by people voting for each picture

The IRC troll troop ended up only voting for the shittiest pictures and the idea was then dropped

>>2984349
Hey! Are you the guy who did paparazzi street portraiture with 400mm lens or something?

File: 1384134573862.jpg (30KB, 500x359px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 500x359px

>>2984948
That's Eggy.

>Being thought as Eggy.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	500
Image Height	359

>>2984954
Sorry. I tuned out for several years, came back few months ago. Is he still around?

>>2984954
Eggy actually contributed a fuckton to this board, unlike you

>>2984974
this

>>2984975

is

>>2984977

false.

>>2984974
You can be a salty shitposting prick, but in reality they are both immature cunts that each have contributed to the board positively in a variety of ways.

>>2984954
I vote for Eggy to make the book. He volunteered last time when Iggy failed to deliver on everything but excuses.

File: Capture.png (30KB, 478x537px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 478x537px

>>2985016
He volunteered and never followed through with it.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>>2985030

>Igor Oliveira

Is he Brazilian?

>>2985044
>Iggy
>Igor

>>2985045

What did he mean by this?

>>2984936
Lol.

I say keep the books coming.

Ideally a /p/ book would be curated by someone who is very active on /p/ and has decent judgement skills and picks a good one or two every day basically.

I'm not a fan of having to submit shit and you can tell from the last one it's usually the tripfags (shocker) who do it.

>>2985155
> you can tell by the last one it's usually the tripfags
How new are you?

>>2984854
One day you may learn to read a photograph beyond the superficial elements.
:^)

>>2985208
this is bait

>>2985208
>>2985210
Go back to bed, isi.

>>2985155
>Ideally a /p/ book would be curated by someone
So 1 person?

lol

>>2984943
Pretty sure that was the facebook troll troop actually.
Mobilised by a certain butthurt faggot because he doesn't want anyone else making a book even though he's only on the board once a year to have his dick sucked about it.
Iggy should never be allowed to have anything to do with the book again; he shouldn't even have pics in it, if he actually shot any, and definitely shouldn't be in charge of putting it together.
It should obviously be made by the people who actually used the board all year. We could set up a Discord or indeed IRC channel where everybody could have a say or maybe a more secure form of voting than last year, but don't let nIggy anywhere near it.

>>2984954
>Being thought as Eggy.
Do you still teach English?

>>2985246
You want to know how I know that you don't know shit?

I always encouraged other people to make other books, when I made the first book, people didn't want it to be curated.
I told them if they wanted to make a non curated book, then that's fine, but I was going to make a curated one.

That resulted in the Zine dude appearing, he did his thing and then left.

I did the curated book again, no one did anything else. Last year I did open submission and no one did anything else.
I had a very good system to prevent trolling from ever "messing up" the results of the curation, which I layed out if anyone else wanted to use it.

Also, I sent all the pics to Eggy as you can see here >>2985030
Did he ever make the book? No.

I don't impede anyone from actually making a book, it's just that no one actually does it.

>Iggy should never be allowed to have anything to do with the book again; he shouldn't even have pics in it
My photos haven't appeared in the last two books I did, so I don't do the book to put my picture in it.

>It should obviously be made by the people who actually used the board all year.
Well yeah? It's curated, meaning anyone from the board can sign up to curate the book. All I will do is put the photos together in some shitty software and upload to blurb.
But the book itself will be made by the board and I will have little say in what gets in or doesn't. The curated versions have always been like this.

>>2985248
>My photos haven't appeared in the last two books I did, so I don't do the book to put my picture in it.
I know; you don't take photos.
One more reason for you to fuck off.

>>2985249
How do you knowwwwwwww

>>2985248
>when I made the first book

BJDrew made the first book

File: 1365543610964.jpg (82KB, 529x528px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 529x528px

>>2985262
I made it.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2013:01:03 02:34:45
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	542
Image Height	530

>>2985264
Do you feel any warmth around your ankles or thighs? Like your pants were on fire?

File: B0172071-y720px.jpg (95KB, 479x720px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 479x720px

>>2984703
I add what I know about. If there is anything I don't know about you should tell me, or add it yourself.

>>2984856
The books. As above, tell or add if theres anyhting missing.
http://pseudosticky.wikia.com/wiki/Pseudo_sticky#Learn_to_Pee

>>2984948
That's me. It's a 70-200mm now, was a 500mm catadioptric then, and numerous other focallenghts in between.
http://oh-hi.info

>>2985030
>He volunteered and never followed through with it.
No.
*You made it sound like it had expired and deleted by blurb.*
So I asked for the archive of all the images in an attempt to actually have a 2015 book.
But the next day, after spending several hours making blurb work and dicking around with test layouts to get a feel for the most efficient and way to do it (and demonstrate that it doesn;' take anyhting like as long as you take to do them) I see you were posting about the book, and it being finished and available to buy.

So basically you seriously fail at communicate and then pulled it out of your ass without saying anything to me.
If i lived in Brazil I'd come around just to scowl at you like a bitch for a few minutes and then leave without saying a word.

>>ALL
Also; 'traditionally' the photobook usually happens in the year after. So normally the 2016 book would be organised and produced for release in about march 2017.
But the last few seem to be getting more and more prematurely initiated.
*cough*

I did volunteer to do it, but *if* I did it would be the Eggy Tyrant version uncurated by you aesthetically puerile and subjectively cursed sperglords.

Of course some cunts would try to get multiple entries and just fuck it up in general because me... so I actually cbf.
But will if required.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model	PENTAX K-3
Camera Software	darktable 2.0.3
Photographer	Andrew Wade Eglington oh-hi.info
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	300 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2016:12:04 00:53:36
Exposure Time	1/500 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	200.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	479
Image Height	720
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Hard
Saturation	Low
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

>>2985269
So I asked for the archive of all the images in an attempt to actually have a 2015 book.
But the next day, after spending several hours making blurb work and dicking around with test layouts to get a feel for the most efficient and way to do it (and demonstrate that it doesn;' take anyhting like as long as you take to do them) I see you were posting about the book, and it being finished and available to buy.

How fucking thick are you?

Man I really do wish I had screencaps of that thread (maybe it's archived?) so I could show you that I mentioned SEVERAL times, even before you asked for the photos, that I was going to publish it.

>then pulled it out of your ass without saying anything to me.
>you actually believe this.

>>2985270
I have it archived. And it's a clusterfuck of irrelevant.
Seriously though... why would I abuse you for making it? I was abusing you for making it and not adequately announcing it. You gave the impression it was gone.
...why the fuck else would I be asking for the assets if i knew you still had ready to go?
You were posting links ot the fucking lowres pdf as if that was all that remained.
It wasn't until numerous hours later that you made a proper thread with a link to the actual book purchase page,.
Sheeeeeeesuschristmotherfucker.

>>2985275
Well yes...

Blurb only let's you have a low res copy of the actual file, to get the high res, you have to buy it. Which some anon usually does and shares it with everyone.
I also mentioned in the thread that I was uploading the book, which was something like 800MB. I left it overnight, but there was an error, so I had to reupload it again.

I live in Brazil, my upload maxes out at like 100kbps, so that's why the actualy book link only showed up a day or so later.
But I did say in the thread that I was finished with it, and just needed to upload.

>>2985270
Face it Iggy, you have fallen from grace a long time ago, I believe mostly from not delivering on time. I know a few places that actually fire you and you can be glad if you don't get sued afterwards for not delivering on time, even once.
No need to defend yourself and do the damage control dance, no matter how false the accusations are.
Just give up and maybe someone will volunteer to put the book together and gets a group to curate it. if it happens
But if you continue to force it on the board then you can be sure it will be whines, moans and death threats to no end for you.
I would back out of this mess if I were you, it can't be mended in any way.

>>2985282
>Face it Iggy, you have fallen from grace a long time ago, I believe mostly from not delivering on time.
I didn't deliver on time once lol

>I know a few places that actually fire you and you can be glad if you don't get sued afterwards for not delivering on time, even once.
Thank fuck I didn't sign an official /p/ contract, phew!

>Just give up and maybe someone will volunteer to put the book together and gets a group to curate it. if it happens
But if you continue to force it on the board then you can be sure it will be whines, moans and death threats to no end for you.
I would back out of this mess if I were you, it can't be mended in any way.

I don't mind, there has been literally no book thread in history that didn't have whining and moaning.

>>2985280
Like i said, the thread was a clusterfuck. Re-reading it I can see that there was a lot of confusion because you suck at making clear statements. Obviously I misconstrued what you meant. I'm pretty sure almost everyone else did too.
Don't fixate on that bullshitfest though.
If you are going to be leaping in months in advance to do the fucking book, then do the fucking book and don't screw around. Once you have them all, taking anything longer than a few days to put all the images into it is completely insane.

>>2985290
Sure, I admit that it took much longer than it should.

>>2985287
>>I know a few places that actually fire you and you can be glad if you don't get sued afterwards for not delivering on time, even once.
>Thank fuck I didn't sign an official /p/ contract, phew!
Let me guess, you don't have a steady job or business going on. It would be impossible with such shitty mentality. Except macky d but that is not a real workplace.

>>2985293
>Thinking I'm fancy enough for macky d
Bitch, I work at Bob's Burgers

>>2985248
abloo bloo bloo
Cry me a river m8. Just switch off to the drama you manletchild

>>2985296
>Just switch off to the drama

You want me to switch to the drama or switch off the drama?

>>2985297
I want you to come the fuck in or fuck the fuck off.

>>2985298
I would like to come the fuck in.

What exactly would you require of me to do that?

>>2985299
--to fuck the fuck off.

>>2985300
Make up your mind dude, you're confusing me.

>>2985302
I made up my mind already senpai. You seem to be too easily confused to carry on this conversation, mebbe it's best if you have a wee biscuit in the cupboard.

>>2985264
Did you forget about this?
http://www.blurb.com/b/3100411-a-photography-collection-from-the-internet-s-wild

>>2985313
I made 3 books, when I said first, of course I meant the first book I made.

Jesus.

>>2985314
Dat inflated ego, jesus fuck!

>>2985314
Yes but the way you phrased it made it sound like the /p/ books you made were the first and only /p/ books ever made... Eggy is right, you aren't good at making clearly comprehensibly statements.

File: 1382472918056.jpg (111KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 500x500px

>>2985317
Maybe I expect too much of you guys to understand that when I say first, of course I mean my first.

Why would I mean the first p book ever?

>>2985318
I don't want to sound like a dick, but is english your first language? Because these things should be pretty clear from the contextual clues and natural connotations of the phrasing; even if the statement was ambiguous, the interpretation whose sense I described is more strongly suggested than what you intended to say.

>>2985318
So you first and foremost think about yourself. Why would we trust you to organize a community thing? You're a selfish dick and you can't be trusted

>>2985323
Okay let me quote myself.

>>2985248
>I always encouraged other people to make other books, when I made the first book, people didn't want it to be curated.
>when I made the first book, people didn't want it to be curated.
>people didn't want it to be curated.

>I told them if they wanted to make a non curated book, then that's fine, but I was going to make a curated one.
>but I was going to make a curated one.

Was the first /p/ book ever curated? Nope.
Did I have any say about anything in the first book ever? Nope.

So why would you think I'm talking about the first book ever?

i can curate this book.

>>2985326
So you're saying that you were referring to /p/ books in the context of a specific distinction between curated and non-curated books. That's what you meant.

First of all that is not suggested by any of the information your post includes. You are assuming that people will incorporate SPECIFIC contextual information into their interpretation of your GENERAL statement; you did not say anything there about the fact that the first /p/ book was not curated. Why would you think that an audience would already know a specific premise to the argument whose CONCLUSION you present in your initial statement? At best that's a gross error in reasoning, at worst it demonstrates that you lack a sufficient comprehension of conversational english and its more subtle idiosyncrasies.

Syntagmatically speaking, the structure/sequencing of your post does not suggest your intended meaning at all. If you wanted to communicate that meaning, you would present the specific determination (curated vs. non curated) books BEFORE the more general determination (/p/ books you have made) that it qualifies.

In other words, you introduce your topic (/p/ books) in its most general form; in fact you only say "books," not /p/ books (because it should be clear from overall context that you're talking about /p/ books and not just books). However in the same phrase that you introduce your topic you SPECIFICALLY QUALIFY IT with the claim that you "made the first book." Even if you add the more specific determination after (that the first book you made was the first book amongst all the curated books), the order in which the information is presented does not suggested that there was a non-curated book that existed before yours, but that the /p/ books were curated from the start.

>>2985336
This is our man for the job

>>2985343
tl;dr

>>2985345

See:

>>2985290
>I can see that there was a lot of confusion because you suck at making clear statements. Obviously I misconstrued what you meant. I'm pretty sure almost everyone else did too.

tl;dr you're illiterate

>>2985346
Ohhhhh wait, I think I understand now.

>>2985370
what an age we live in

>>2985373
Age of stupid? That would explain Trump and Hillary

File: 1364587582723.jpg (49KB, 310x310px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 310x310px

>>2985373

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	310
Image Height	310

>>2985385
fuck off

>>2985385
HIGH FIVE
seriously although you're a piece of shit for not posting more I appreciate the effort to keep this board alive, I really do

>>2985393
We can keep the board alive by shitposting, it's really true.

>>2985385
What do you set the book up in, InDesign?

>>2985453
Blurb's propietary software.

>>2985455
Hm, What's the final cost of the book usually? Also is it hardback? I may have a different service that would probably be cheaper to do; although I'd have to look into their prices compared to blurb. It's been awhile and I don't even have the name of the place off hand.

>>2985458
It depends on the number of the pages. As each book has gotten bigger (especially last year's open submission book), I wanna keep it smaller this year, so it's more accessible.

The reason we use blurb is because of shipping rates, since blurb has distribution centers in North America/Europe and other places too, shipping is usually cheap for everyone.

>>2985453
>We can keep the board alive by shitposting, it's really true.
Threatened to swat anyone lately, fetal alcohol syndrome faggot?

>>2985463
I never did such thing. Ironic you say that, as someone had threatened to swat me.

>>2985460
Yeah. That's what I'm concerned about. I believe this place has no page limit, although I'm not entirely sure how they do shipping to other countries.

>>2985468
>I never did such thing. Ironic you say that, as someone had threatened to swat me.
You threatened to call UCLA and report Dilldong to the campus police for having a disassembled handgun in his possessions.
You also claimed isi threatened to kill your dog, which is absolutely retarded.

>>2985468
If you can look up rates and post in thread later, as well as site and stuff, that'll be great.

There was talk about switching services for the second book, but there was nothing cheaper and Artisan State got expensive as fuck.

>>2985469
I don't have a dog?
I didn't threaten. I said be careful. Why is he waving around the fact he owns a gun on a campus while his name and work is attached to his online identity?
Just saying. Anyone could report him for such shit.

>>2985473
>I didn't threaten. I said be careful.
A masked threat is still a threat.

>I don't have a dog?
so you didn't contact isi's sister, accuse her of threatening you, then block her when she asked for details?

Interesting.

>>2985473
ITS A SPOT THE TRIPDROPPING ADDERALL ADDICTED TRIPFAG THREAD!
The only thing that could possibly make the 2016 book a bigger failure than the 2015 book is the involvement of a mentally deficient child of alcoholism.

great 2016 /p/ book discussion, guys.

>>2985477
You should have seen the discussion for /p/ 2014.

>>2985475
Woop. Was mobile big tripdrop.

>>2985474
isi has a sister?

I see the circle jerk discord drops their trips all the time :^)

>>2985477
This is typical of a few individuals from the /p/ discord. Unsure why they're upset. They always seem upset at something, and can never be happy it appears.

>>2985474
Hey Jamie.

>>2985480
>isi has a sister?
Yes, you messaged her on instagram if I recall correctly and accused isi of being a narcissist and threatening you.

I've seen screenshots.

>>2985480

The discord wouldn't suck half as bad if isi didn't have her facebook whiteknight army in it. There have been a few discussions about photography in there but it devolves quickly into isi being called on her shit and her whiteknight army coming to the rescue every time.

Not all of them are upset but the vast majority of the ones doing the shitposting here are from the discord or facebook and can fuck right off and around the corner.

>>2985486
Sugar you've been to Discord fewer than a dozen times. No one from the Facebook chats even uses Discord. Stop trying to insert yourself into others drama to feel relevant. You will never be relevant, and you have never been relevant.

>>2985343

But how is your Portuguese?

File: fuckoffisi.png (63KB, 264x340px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 264x340px

>>2985490

That's why I left and yes they do that dumb bitch tags me in the facebook chats every so often just to post a picture of that stupid ass dead bird she shot and then removes me immediately so I know who participates in them and they are in this thread right now.

>>2985486
Don't get me wrong. I had a great time talking to a majority of them. There is a handful of those who don't fall into the category of being enjoyable to talk to.

>>2985485
Alright then. Guess I'm sus

>>2985494
Oh Jesse, you poor clod. She didn't add you to troll you...she added you to troll the chat, because no one wants to be in a chat with you.
"You know what would be really funny?"
"what?"
"If I added Sugar"
"OH GOD DON"
*sugar has joined the conversation*
"lol jk"
*kicks sugar*

>>2985498
>>2985496
>>2985495
>>2985494
>>2985490
>>2985486
>>2985485
>>2985482
>>2985480
>>2985475
>>2985474
>>2985473
>>2985469
>>2985468
>>2985463

kill yourselves, you fucking preening faggots.

>>2985496

I read the chat and I wouldn't want to be part of that shit anyway. It's a big fucking circlejerk hugbox, no thank you.

>>2985500
*preteen

>>2985495
>Alright then. Guess I'm sus
t. proven liar

>>2985494
>TRIGGERED

Wow, unironically spergtalking outside 4chan. What a bunch of winners we have there.

>>2985503
>It's a big fucking circlejerk hugbox
how can a chat that barely ever talks about photography be a circlejerking hugbox
usually its just memes, politics, and tfw shitposts

Certainly not a hugbox for isi if Dill's in there. They argue all the time.

>>2985507
>unironically
clearly still ironically

>>2985505
Preening is a verb, FAS-baby.

The whole facebook/discord/irc circlejerk should be banned from /p/ imo

>>2985510
No shit. Obviously you missed the joke.

Iggy I found the other site but I'm in the road right now. I'll look at it closer when I get to where I'm going.

File: Untitled-1.jpg (233KB, 900x528px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 900x528px

>>2985513
>No shit. Obviously you missed the joke.
Nah, I've seen your face. It's not a bad punchline at all.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	900
Image Height	528
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:28 12:01:59
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	900
Image Height	528

This.
Fucking.
Thread.

>Why /p/ has gone downhill: the thread.

Welp, time to finally abandon this shithole here.

>>2985515
no, it's time to make it better
it's long overdue

File: 1.jpg (318KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 667x1000px

>>2984320
Hey there, Iggy. You sure love a bit of suffering, eh? I've got some thoughts about the next book.

1) Deliver it as quickly as possible. This is mostly on you and your life but I'd say the end of February should be the latest publishing date. Earlier would be better.

2) To that end, cutoff should be January 15. That leaves enough time for someone who really believes their new year's eve film shots to get their negs developed and scanned.

3) One photo per person. It would cut down tremendously on the size and cost of the book. It also wouldn't reduce the number of people participating in it at all. The purpose of the book should be to demonstrate the talents of the community as a whole, rather than to promote the works of any one photographer. One photo per person does not hinder the overall goal.

4) Curate it. In the long run, I think people care more about the quality of past books than whether or not everyone who submitted got in. The curation process you used a couple years ago worked pretty well, but I would not object to any changes we can come up with to speed up the process.

Thoughts?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon PowerShot G9 X
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	180 dpi
Vertical Resolution	180 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:03 14:14:36
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	160
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	19.34 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	667
Image Height	1000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2985525
Whole heartedly agree with you.

I think 1 photo will work, but the reason I wanted two photos is because there have been really strong sets of 2 images in the past.
Something I really liked and thought gave an umph to the book, but I'm not opposed to trying out 1 image this year and see how it does.

If we do only 1 image per son, we can probably still use the same process as last time and still be much faster. Since the past curation processes
People were regularly submitting 3-5 images, so we'll be cutting like 3x the amount of photos we'd have to go through. Also I still don't know a more secure way to handle the curation other than flickr.

>>2985515
Meh. I have no problem actually doing /p/ related shit.

>>2985514
Lol this one gets me every time.

The fact that some took their time and effort to produce this masterpiece.

>>2985511
It's almost like photographers are some sort of attention seeking faggots by nature.

>>2985529
>what is an artist

>>2985531
what is a /p/ user

>>2985525
>3) One photo per person. It would cut down tremendously on the size and cost of the book.

This. Though let anyone submit up to around 4-6 images for the curation process so they have a greater chance of making it in.

Can /p/ book be on our 4cc team next cup?

>>2985538
Heh, we'll include that in our next discussion.

>230 / 16 / 55 / 1

>>2985545
I know you think this means something since you've seen people post that information bar before except in this case it doesn't actually mean anything because 55 people making 230 posts is absolutely normal.
If it were 230 posts for 10 people, thats when you have a real problem.

>>2985545
>>2985571
How do you guys see this 55?

>>2985526
Not him, but while we are in the mood for suggestions...:

I don't know how far one may go with this on Blurb, but try to improve a bit the design, Iggy. if possible, stablish a grid; give the images space (and don't be afraid to not fill the page); give the whole thing an underlying order. Names don't need to be always centered; use alignments as if you had an OCD.

This kind of stuff will improve the book a lot and will help the photos too.

>>2985581
What do you mean by grid?

File: screen-shot-2013-04-04-at-7-02-11-pm.png (103KB, 925x476px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 925x476px

>>2985582
Something like this (sorry for poor example):

>>2985591
Well then yes, all the photos are arranged on a grid then. But since there's no text, other than photo credit, there's not much to do on the page?

I'm all up for ideas, but I can't think of any other way to present the photos than 1 big image on the page with the photo credit under.
I'm not being sarcastic when I say please show me examples, so please show me if you have any ideas on how to display them :3

>>2985593
I honestly think your work is actually harder with no text, considering you'll probably be dealing with images in different aspect ratios etc.

I'll try to create an example (because finding one on internet will be hard, I guess...), but this thing will need some thought, so it will take a bit of time. (And it will be just an example. I'm not exactly a good designer...).

>>2985598
No worries mate, this thread will stay up. Thanks for the help and initiation <3

>>2985593
personally I like the minimal approach, overwrought pagesetting has a tendency to distract from the image
one thing that might make these books work better is tighter thematic unity (i.e. submissions are required to fit under it), but I don't know if we have enough people to accomplish that anymore. the previous photobooks have tended to be a smattering of pretty pictures that don't make any sense together

>>2985608
>tfw you didn't like my organizing :(

All books I've done had a flow like

Landscape>Landscape with people
People>Urban with people>urban
and then abstract themes at the end.

>>2985612
no you did fine with the material offered. I'm saying you might end up with a more coherent book if you set up something like:
>okay guys the theme this year is PRIMARY COLORS. submit photos that fit into the following categories: RED, YELLOW, BLUE
>okay guys the theme this year is MOVEMENT. submit photos that fit into the following categories: FLYING, SWIMMING, SCATALOGICAL HUMOR
>okay guys the theme this year is LITERATURE. submit photos that illustrate your response to the following movements: MAGICAL REALISM, THEATER OF THE ABSURD, GERMAN ROMANTICISM

>>2985616
Ohhhh, gotcha.

>>2985619
In the past books did you categorize the two images and sort them in the book by portrait and landscape? One thing I've learned about photo books is that it doesn't to justice to the book if the viewer has to rotate it multiple times to see multiple images.
If that makes any sense.

File: dont forget.png (258KB, 600x439px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 600x439px

>>2985515

>>2985511
You do realize that our mods/janitors are from among those ranks, right? They run the show.

>>2985515
See you next week

>>2985625
That's only to be expected of degenerates who aren't satisfied with sitting on /p/ all day but also have to set up external discord channels just to get enough shitposting action; they're feckless un(der)employed millenials with enough time on their hands to
>do it for free

File: 01.png (46KB, 1758x927px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 1758x927px

(Reposting because text was messed up).

Ok, I'm assuming a square-sized book. This is how I'd start to think its design. Since we're dealing mainly with photos and names, and I don't know which aspect ratios we will encounter, I think a "flexible" grid is the way to go (i. e. without too many guide lines). Starting from a suggested square-sized picture (which, by my terms, would always be in the middle of the page in a square-sized book), I've defined just two main axis (the red lines) to rule the page elements, being the vertical one the most important -- it will guide almost all elements of the pages, with few exceptions. As you can see, vertical red axis is ruling the aligment of photos, names and page numbers. The names have their own base line (blue line). Photos will almost always be based on horizontal red axis. Golden lines are margins -- the only acceptable element to be outside these lines is the page number, which is secondary (still, it can't be anywhere near the limits of the page).

Here's the catch: the names will never be in another position. They will always be aligned with red axis (by its left side) and based on the blue line. Always. By doing this, I'm starting to suggest a certain order. We need "flexibility" on image placement. We'll have it...

File: 02.png (39KB, 1758x927px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 1758x927px

>>2985671

So this is how a spread would look like with two images, one 1:1 and one 3:2. Don't mind the blank spaces, and don't mind the difference in space between left and right sides of the 3:2 image. The sense of harmony here won't be given by equal measures; it will be given by the "underlying order" that I mentioned. Think the book as a whole. You don't see a detached page in a book; you see the book as a whole, the page being one "instance". If the book has a strong "inner system" ruling its elements across the spreads, it will be difficult to break this harmony, as long as you're respecting this "inner system" you defined.

File: 03.png (39KB, 1758x927px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 1758x927px

>>2985672

Same image as before, but with the guides.

File: 04.png (39KB, 1758x927px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 1758x927px

>>2985673

So here we've some sort of a extreme case. A 2:1 image that could look strange or just too small in our defined grid. You have permission to "break the rules" -- to a certain extent -- in order to insure visual harmony in a spread. The system was defined with this kind of stuff in mind. Just note that...

File: 05.png (40KB, 1758x927px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 1758x927px

>>2985675

...the rules are just partially broken. Name continues to be in the same place as others; the image is respecting margins etc. In the end, dealing with this stuff just requires a good eye for balance and respect for some principles you stablish in the begining of the design process.

Right, but does all this stuff actually works? This particular design is really simple, but I think it didn't do too bad after all.

File: 06.png (437KB, 1758x927px) Image search: [Google]

437KB, 1758x927px

>>2985676

Example 1, the 1:1 and 3:2 images (cropped a bit the photos, sorry masters of photography).

File: 07.png (284KB, 1758x927px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 1758x927px

>>2985677

Example 2, the 2:1 and 3:2 images.

File: 08.png (52KB, 1758x927px)

52KB, 1758x927px

>>2985678

Example 3: yes, when you have text, the text respects your guide lines too.


So that's it. I'm not saying this is the best way to do it, but I guess you got the idea.
Fellow /p/hotogs may not like the blank space, but bear with me, guys. This is important: blank space, when used well, improves the perception of an image, specially on a book, where the image isn't alone.

Oh, one last thing: be smart. If you have 2 1:1 images, there's no reason to not put them in the same spread. Same with 3:2 images etc. This will make your job easier...

>>2985621
Can you please stop pretending to know what you're talking about? This table is for the older kids.

>>2985671
>>2985672
>>2985673
>>2985675
>>2985676
>>2985677
>>2985678
>>2985679


Eh personally seeing the design not being uniform to equal breathing space and all is off-putting. I think there should be as much even negative space on each side, that way the edges and borders don't feel constricting on the image. If the image isn't the same aspect ratio as the page, then it should be set up accordingly, and as best as possible.

>>2985682
Don't you have a discord to be shitposting in?

>>2985616
No thats a horrible idea this book is for the best photos of the year if you tell people there is a theme they have to find photos that match that theme but arent necessary their best. I vote against this. For example what if the theme is movement but my best photo of the year is abstract shapes or patterns. I now have to find a new photo to use for the book to fit the theme.

>>2985686
>Don't you have a discord to be shitposting in?
No. Got a link? Wouldn't mind shitposting somewhere new.

>>2985687
>but arent necessary their best.
what you think is your best isn't necessarily your best either
being asked to think about themes instead of stupid numerical rankings (as if that can actually contain the work of people whose entire catalog of work self-references)

If you take "what people think is their best" you get a lot of "this is the shallowest dof portrait Ive ever taken!" and not a lot of deep thought about what makes a photo meaningful and communicative. Themes are way better than that garbage.

File: Screen Shot 2016-12-18 at 11.22.28 PM.png (169KB, 2806x1410px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 2806x1410px

>>2985688
Yeah I do.

>>2985686
Although this is more traditional. It allows for larger images. I just feel that when you leave so much white space you're wasting area that could be used for the image itself.

In a perfect world, you would have everyone submit images that can be subject to cropping of some sort. Find a good size between 8x8 and 8x11 and crop all images slightly with a full-bleed print.

>>2985686

Maybe you're right. Problem is: either you ensure equal breathing space or strict yourself to a grid. When dealing with images of different ratios and orientations, there's no third way, I'm afraid...

>>2985675

Correcting myself here: "ensure", not "insure".

>>2985698
Yeah' it's far too tough when working with so many different image sizes and ratios. If you're going for equality, finding a book size that fits between the static and more dynamic image sizes is the best idea.

Or like I said here :
>>2985695
Do a full bleed of the images, and possibly end up cropping too much of the images.

>>2985695

>I just feel that when you leave so much white space you're wasting area that could be used for the image itself.

I understand. But there's a bit of "horror vacui" in this feeling. White space has its importance (but I will give you that: I may be overestimating it. Well, I said I wasn't exactly a good designer... a good one will balance all these things).

>>2985678
>>2985677
personally I hate this fad with a fiery vengeance. whenever I come across a book that's set like this, I wish I could just see the goddamn picture a little larger. It's "cute" in that it follows some trendy design rubric, but it's not functional

>>2985702
Here's the skinny, white space works online or when images can be pulled up in a larger size.

I would NEVER buy a photobook if they had margins like this >>2985677
>>2985678
I'll pay money for images, not white space. Imagine buying a poster that was 40% blank.

>>2985782
>Here's the skinny
>I would NEVER
Don't you think you're overvaluing the "I" in delivering this "skinny?"

>>2985788
So you would buy a photobook filled with white space?

>>2985789
>filled with
so you regularly inflate your sentences with hyperbole

>>2985790
Show me, on the doll, where I triggered you.

>>2985791
*points to notions of intellectual honesty on the doll*

>>2984320
ye

File: william-eggleston-the-democratic-forest-selected-works-david-zwirner-books-010.jpg-876x584.jpg (179KB, 876x584px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 876x584px

>>2985793
Don't take this as an insult, but have you ever actually physically picked up and looked through a professional photo book? Or any commercial printed photography? None of it looks like >>2985677 >>2985678

You don't pay for empty, blank pages. You pay for photos, even when the photos are grabbed out of this gutter of a board.

>>2985796
that book still has fuckhuge margins though (and I hate them)

>>2985799
That was just an example, most portraiture books I've seen completely cover the page.

>>2985800
yeah it's a shitty example though, it practically proves the guy's point
the tiny pictures on fuckhuge pages thing is definitely a modern design trend in art books, and it's fucking retarded. nobody cares about the "book as a whole" just like nobody reads the overwrought dissertation that serves as text. they are there for the pictures.

>>2985314
You made nothing.
You collected the work of others and uploaded it to a website.
And last time you had to do that it took you half a fucking year.

It's the simplest task in the world and you keep fucking it up. And people keep sucking your dick and thanking you for the effort just the same.

>>2985323
It gets better; he used to teach English to others.

>>2985688
https://discord.gg/fNet5n3

>>2985806

Iggy I gotta roast you over that the last /p/ book was full of that shit and my one token photo in the book was the size of a fucking baseball card there was actually more negative space than photo

photo books are for photos no one buys photobooks to look at giant white margins the size of a fucking Texas lot lizard. get your shit together already.

File: 2.jpg (178KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1500x1000px

>>2985526
In addition to having only one photo for person, I would suggest omitting names entirely. Just include a note somewhere in the book that each photo is by a different photographer. I don't think it would upset anyone (in fact, it would remove the opportunity for someone to be mislabelled) and it would streamline the design.

Creative layouts can make sense for a collection of one photographer's work, but in our case I believe the book should be square with one photo per page, centred and taking up most of the page in the long dimension. That will show off the photos best and be equally fair to everyone. It also makes the process of putting the book together a lot faster.

>>2985616
I don't think this is a very good idea for a book being done just once a year. There are other avenues for collecting photos from /p/ that fit a theme.

Each person submits up to three photos and a small team of curators selects the best one. I think that would be the optimal way to do it.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon PowerShot G9 X
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.9
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	180 dpi
Vertical Resolution	180 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:16 15:49:44
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	640
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	1 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	30.60 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1500
Image Height	1000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2985834
>In addition to having only one photo for person, I would suggest omitting names entirely. Just include a note somewhere in the book that each photo is by a different photographer. I don't think it would upset anyone (in fact, it would remove the opportunity for someone to be mislabelled) and it would streamline the design.
No

>>2985837
I don't suppose you have a counterargument to go with that?

>>2985838
It's just a bad idea mate, the books have always contained the photographers name or trip. Removing them because muh streamline design is just nonsense.

>>2985829
Maybe you should follow the rules and actually send me a file that meets the size requirement and not a 1000px photo.
Your photo wasn't the only one that was sent too smal as well.

>>2985931
The printing is at like 80dpi, it's fucking abortion worthy for a $60 book, 1000px is plenty big enough you dumb cunt.

If anyones interested, i can get 50 page 300 dpi photobooks for around £25 each printed.

>>2985829
Also if you recall, you did the same shit on /p/ 2014. So you get your shit together mate.

>>2985932
Something about what the blurb app does means that if you put in an image smaller then what it wants you can;t scale it up to fit the page. Not that I found in the couple of hours I messed around with it anyway. Presumably they coded it for big format pages and it just cascaded into the smaller books layouts for ease of coding and so morons didnt design a small book and then wonder why it prints shithouse at large formats.
iirc the smallest page-filling image was 1300px^2

>>2985933
And this is why you shouldn't be trusted.
Why not acknowledge your mistakes and try to improve? Why all the namecalling to defend your inflated ego?
The book should be about the boards photos not about you! Yet year after year it is about you and all the drama you are inducing around yourself. You just want attention, nothing else.
You are not the right person to organize the book.

>>2985834
>omit names
Sounds dumb, but is actually a good idea.
Put the names/pagenumber on the index page..only.
Mostly becasue this is a huge timesaver. The proforma layouts the blurb app offers are pretty simple. Yhey can be modified somewhat, but iirc i specifically wanted to automate the transferal of username from the index (which you can insert from a list of text) to the page their image was on...
nope.
But the footer field is a) difficult to modify b) contains the page number anyway c) tends to occupy space on the page weather it's visible or not.
Therefore simply having pages numbered in the outer corner, and an index with names/pages.. would probably be the quickest and least pointless screwing around way to go about it.
It also means your photo takes up all of the available space. Something we should always strive to do with these fairly shitty little books.

Can we get eggy to do the book?

>>2985949
seconding this

>>2985945
>Something we should always strive to do with these fairly shitty little books.
Hey come on now

>>2985952
Every photobook I have ever bought from blurb is pretty mediocre. The only half decent presentation has been maximum image spread per page.

>>2985796
>>2985806

Guy who made the examples here. Calm down, son. The point I'm making with those examples isn't about the size of images on a page, although I briefly talked about it. It's about the design principle of stablishing a system. Simple as that. Book design takes weeks of work, and I did an example in... one hour. So calm down.

That being said, this isn't a "modern" idea whatsoever -- not in the sense you are thinking. Just look for Ulm's publications...

>>2985943
Then resize the image you dumbfuckupsidedowncunt.

Last time I submitted to the book iggy told me my photos didn't fit with the book - ill never forget that day.

fug iggy, I heard he marks up the books 50% and keeps the profit. dont trust him.

>>2986059
>iggy told me my photos didn't fit with the book
That should be a compliment

File: abc.jpg (165KB, 638x638px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 638x638px

Guy from examples here again.

>>2985796
>Don't take this as an insult, but have you ever actually physically picked up and looked through a professional photo book? Or any commercial printed photography?

See pic related. I don't know if this kind of stuff isn't common in some places, though.

But I understand the general concern. I studied design, but I'm a photographer above all. Very often a designer's idea isn't aligned with a photog's wish...

>>2985799
That definitely doesn't look "huge" for me, for instance. But I guess taste plays some role in these matters...

>>2985834
>I would suggest omitting names entirely

This actually seems a good idea to me. I agree with >>2985945 in this regard.


That all being said, well, I'm actually stepping back from my suggestion. It's obviously not very popular, and the book is for /p/ after all. You guys have to like it...

Good luck, Iggy; hope the examples weren't totally unworthy, anyway.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:12:19 14:51:23
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Exposure Bias	0.7 EV
Focal Length	45.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	638
Image Height	638
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2985932
80 dpi? at that point we may as well fingerpaint the book with our own feces

File: fuckyouiggy.jpg (210KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 1366x768px

>>2985931
>>2985933

Wrong answer cocksucker

here's 2016